तमेव तत्तेज प्लुष्टविड्भावं हैममुमां संश्लिष्य वसन्तं चन्द्रकोटिसमप्रभं चन्द्रकिरीटं सोमसूर्याग्निनयनं भूतिभूषितविग्रहं शिवं मामेवमभिध्यायन्तो मुक्तकिल्बिषास्त्यक्तबन्धा मय्येव लीना भवन्ति
tameva tatteja pluṣṭaviḍbhāvaṃ haimamumāṃ saṃśliṣya vasantaṃ candrakoṭisamaprabhaṃ candrakirīṭaṃ somasūryāgninayanaṃ bhūtibhūṣitavigrahaṃ śivaṃ māmevamabhidhyāyanto muktakilbiṣāstyaktabandhā mayyeva līnā bhavanti
«Him indeed — that light, consuming impurity, abiding, embracing golden Umā, radiant as a myriad moons, moon-crowned, whose eyes are the moon, the sun, and fire, whose form is adorned with ash — Śiva, me — those who thus contemplate, freed from sin, having abandoned their bonds, become dissolved in me».
b2548d2fb171 · publicado 12 ago 2026, 5:00:00 UTC
Disponible enRUENPasa de verso en verso con
The book ends with a description, and this description is a face, not an abstraction: a crown, three eyes, ash on the body, Umā in his embrace. This is worth attending to, for it contradicts everything that came before. For two hundred lines it spoke of the invisible, the unpointed-to, the inexpressible, the non-dual, whom not even the gods see; and as soon as it comes to contemplation, gold, moon, crown, and consort at once appear.
The reason is not the author's inconsistency, but the nature of the matter. One cannot contemplate the «unpointed-to» — contemplation requires something to contemplate; and every teaching, once it reaches the injunction «contemplate», is forced to bring back the form it had just denied. The Vaishnava side accepted this position from the outset and so does not stumble on it. It says that negations remove the materiality of the form, not the form itself; that nirākāra, «formlessness», means «without a form made of the elements», not «without any form at all».
The closing words of the line — mayy eva līnā bhavanti, «become dissolved in me» — deserve, however, another look at their order. Dissolution is placed after the contemplation of the face, not in its place; and so even where the stated goal is merger, the way to it turns out to be a relation to the One who has a face. This, to my mind, is the chief conclusion to draw from the whole book. It set out to end with the impersonal and ended with a description in which there is a crown, an embrace, and eyes; and a face, once acknowledged, cannot be undone.